Criticizing one of the President's policy positons does not make one a "POTUS hater" ....

[Scuba]

... nor does it imply that the critic will not be voting this fall.

I'm not sure why it's necessary to mention this, but apparently it is.

[JoePhilly]

1. Not sure why it was necessary to mention this outside

a thread in which it might have a context, and a point.

[cui bono]

2. Because too many people don't understand this and it happens in almost every thread.

No context needed.

[Dawgs]

3. Seems like most threads have someone accusing others of hating the President, or..

hoping that he fails.

[JoePhilly]

5. Seems like some folks do hate the President.

Although the strength of how its displayed varies based on the topic ... thus the need for context.

[Ed Suspicious]

74. Seems like folks need to grow up and realize that democrats can hold a nuanced view

of presidents and presidential policy. FOX viewers live in a binary, love/hate world, we grownups do not.

I support my kids but realize they often make stupid decisions. Still love my kids, still want my kids to succeed, but at times they fuck things up. I really don't get what's so hard about this concept.

[rhett o rick]

162. You said it better than I. "I really don't get what's so hard about this concept."

Those that live in "a binary, love/hate world" can not comprehend what you are saying. They live in a self imposed naivete.

We all choose the boundaries of our personal realities. Some choose smaller realities than others. Granted it's dangerous to venture out of one's reality boundaries, but it's equally dangerous to shut oneself in.

[rhett o rick]

138. "Seems like"?? Really?? How do you judge that? The point of the OP is that the

criteria for determining who "hates the President" shouldnt be based on dissent.

Those whose hair burst into flames at the slightest disagreement with the current administration "seems like" want to smite those that may dare to think for themselves. It's too easy to declare that the President is perfect and self-righteously bully those that disagree.

When Michael Hastings died in a car crash, those that dared think it could have included foul play were immediately branded as "Obama haters." It's a bully technique.

Statistically there are no president haters on this board.

[Dawgs]

140. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

All I was saying is that there are a certain number of DUers that like to claim anyone as being critical as being a hater.

I don't agree with them, if that's what you're getting at, but I don't know, because I can't figure out what you're saying.

[merrily]

149. Rhett was not replying to you.

[cui bono]

7. I have never once seen anyone hoping he fails. There are policies of his, like TPP or KXL

pipeline, that should fail. He, however, should not fail. Unfortunately he is failing us. I don't, nor have I seen anyone else, root for that though.

[Dawgs]

13. Unfortunately, many see criticism as hoping for failure.

It's really quite sad how they can't see the difference.

[cui bono]

14. Yes, they are taking it far too personally and react emotionally instead of rationally. n/t

[fleabiscuit]

56. Ya man.

Silly old me was educated at a time where critical analysis was deemed not only a valid part of a democracy, but also a necessary one.

It bugs the hell out me when the hyperbole starts about hating the president at the first hint of criticizing a political stand. To many strawman arguments.

[loudsue]

84. That is intentional, IMHO. This place is crawling with people who want to sabotage any

liberal blog. They have made it a very difficult place to hang out for us old timers.

[kristopher]

104. +1000

[imthevicar]

103. WHY IT WAS NECESSARY IS,

Cause a Post like this will get someone "disappeared" from the Obama Group!

[cui bono]

4. Nor does it warrant a right wing inspired term of ODS.

Using either of those just shows there is no valid argument to be made by the person using the terms. It also shows their immaturity and inability to have reasoned discourse. Apparently they are having fun doing it though, judging by how much they usually laugh after doing it.

[Whisp]

6. of course not. But criticizing every single friggen thing Obama does

or imaginings of some horrible thing he is going to do in the future, and not once commenting positively on any one of the many accomplishments -
well, yeh then, that is Hating. A+ boni fide Hate. And there is more than enough of that here.

[cui bono]

9. No it's not hating. That just means you are taking it too personally.

Really, it's like people are schoolchildren and every criticism has to be couched in a compliment. That's silly. What if the discussion is about TPP? How is there a positive thing to say about that? There is none. SS cuts? Nothing good to say there either. Should we bring up that he changed his mind about same sex marriage in a discussion about free trade? That doesn't make sense.

[Whisp]

15. you misundertand.

What if the discussion is about TPP? How is there a positive thing to say about that?

Of course Not. That is not at all what I meant. Rag on TPP all you want, it is a legitimate beef as any beef is. But if someone crits (and by this I mean in the tone that you would hear from a bagger with all the froth and steam and foam attached) TPP and Every Other Possible Thing Obama does and breathes, that is what I meant.

And there are plenty of those around here. Nothing pleases - the sole mission is to Hate.

[cui bono]

20. Then all you have to do is counter them in a discussion. No reason to say "hater" or "ODS".

Because in my experience those are leveled a lot at people simply because they are making a criticism and yet that criticism is never addressed by the name caller.

[Whisp]

23. I prefer not to take the high road - I've been called a Stasi bot, authoritarian,

because I support the President I have the mental ability of a child reading about their heroes in Tiger Beat.

so no, I'm not taking it lying down. It is a democratic board and the ones who trash Obama supporters are the ones who can fuck the hell off.

[msongs]

59. Tiger Beat is still around? wow! nt

[cui bono]

92. Your anger would be better used towards Obama. He's the one who doesn't act like a Democrat

on far too many and far too important issues.

He has moved the political spectrum even farther to the right and he has expanded severl BushCo policies. So if you want Dems to stop criticizing him get him to act like a Dem.

Calling people Obama haters because they don't want Republican lite doesn't change what is happening legislatively. Neither does not being able to see what is deserving of criticism and taking any criticism personally.

And if you don't believe the criticism is justified feel free to argue it, but with facts relating to the issues, not just calling people "haters" and then putting a few s in your post.

And really, if you don't want people to think you think of Obama as a teen idol you guys could open up the BOG to real discussion and not post pic threads of absolutely no substance that have nothing at all to do with policy, that only exist to... I don't know, the appropriate word really is idolize him.

[Whisp]

94. BOG open for 'real' discussion about the President? lol and haha. Isn't it real enough

for the shit slingers here in Gd and wherever else the flinging is allowed? Need another addition to the shithouse so you want entry to the Barack Obama private forum?

Oh my, but what a steaming pile of:

[cui bono]

95. Who said I want entry? I'd rather live in reality. Not in a bubble full of idol worship

with my head in the sand.

[Bobbie Jo]

100. Jerkish post.

You're not any better than anyone else here.

[truebluegreen]

135. +1

[pangaia]

146. Wisp, hey man.. chill. It's Saturday morning.

All that negative emotion is really bad for one's being-- heart, blood pressure, cancer, mental stability, etc., etc.
I'm not saying this to rag on you just.... thinking about your well being, and hoping you will also..

[Whisp]

151. Having a great cup of coffee and playing with my sweetheart doggie.

I actually think you really meant your post in a nice way! I'm grateful.

[Puglover]

129. I always feel the need to point this out when the

poster you are arguing with is name calling and accusing other Democrats on this board on their behavior towards our President.

The poster is no Democrat and unless their situation changes radically they never will or can be a Democrat.

Because the poster that you are arguing with is a Canadian.

And again I say welcome to everyone posting from offshore.

The issue I have is with people who in reality have no skin in the game here harassing, name calling and judging people that do.

I disagree with you however about the BOG. Why not have a group where no criticism of BO is allowed? We have all of DU where it is allowed. If folks have a need for a haven let them have it. It's just bandwidth.

[Whisp]

152. them damned furiners.

The Chimp would be proud.

[Puglover]

153. Yeah that's exactly the context of my post.

Very nice try though Whisp.

Seriously, you can do better.

[Bobbie Jo]

16. Exactly

As if that weren't bad enough, these disingenuous attempts to frame the behavior as "criticism" is an insult to anyone watching who has a lick of sense.

Certainly anyone who has been reading here for the last 5+ years.

[ProSense]

57. Here's what

"As if that weren't bad enough, these disingenuous attempts to frame the behavior as "criticism" is an insult to anyone watching who has a lick of sense. "

...some can't admit: Criticizing the President on "policy positons" doesn't extend to spinning his positions and then railing against him when the spin turns out to be wrong.

Think about it. For more than a year, there have been any number of articles and commentary about the chained CPI. Yes it sucked, and yes it was included in the President's budget as a carrot to appease Republicans in negotiating tax increases on the rich.

One can scream that it shouldn't have been included, but one cannot ignore the reason it was. Spinning it as something the President wanted is absurd.

Then there is the question: Why didn't he offer up defense cuts? It's as if the person asking the question is oblivious to the point of the offer. Defense cuts are not a carrot to appease Republicans.

Whenever anyone pointed out that Republicans were never going to take him up on the offer, the comeback was that he was playing with people's lives.

Now that the offer is no longer being made, the criticism of the "policy" position remains vicious and stuck in spin, again ignoring the realities since the offer was made: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024540032

It's like the sequestration, these battles aren't pretty because Republicans are despicable. It was a long ugly road to get to the two bills (signed into law in December and January) that ended that policy.

[Pisces]

60. Exactly. This has been going on by the same bunch on this board for a long time.

[Bobbie Jo]

68. Perfect description

Counter with facts, they say.

You just described the schtick to a T. How on earth can one have an honest policy discussion with those so deeply invested in peddling all manner of misrepresentation and half truth. We've witnessed this behavior (from the same crowd) for years. YEARS!

Whisp said it better than I could upthread....screw the high road, it is what it is.

[fleabiscuit]

82. So in other words if the President had not offered up cuts to Social Security -

we would have ended up in exactly the same place? But he did offer them up, so those who still feel raw about it are a bunch of poop heads?

So the crazies in the Republican party did who a favor? This spin make me dizzy.

[Sunlei]

109. The way the President tied those SS 'cuts' to cutting 'loved R tax breaks, loop holes was brilliant.

I wish O & his admin could remain in office for another term.

[fleabiscuit]

167. I suppose.

If offering up something you know won't be accepted so guaranteed sequester cuts that no one wants kicks in is brilliant.

I can hardly believe how some so easily portray the President as so disingenuous that it makes him brilliant. Really? Apparently some have a different view of reality. That's totally understandable given the trauma the Republican party has, and continues to, put everyone through. Well, mostly them.

[kristopher]

106. Thank you.

The site is caught in a trap of its own making. When you make a commitment to free and open speech it is a commitment to an ideal that is too often seen in isolation from the other ideals embodied along with it in our larger system of life. The right to confront an accuser, for example, is a rejection of anonymity and a recognition of the damage that behavior shrouded in secrecy where the motives of the participants is unknowable. That goes with personal responsibility for the things we say and the way we behave generally towards one another - including truth telling and avoidance of shame.

If you are going to have anonymity, then you are either going to have what we've seen DU become, or you are going to have to police it. The standards are difficult and any system you design will to some degree be unjust and punish well intentioned participants.

I'm coming to the conclusion that eventually the idea of anonymous discussion groups is going to die. Perhaps that's a good thing, I don't know.

[uponit7771]

117. +1

[tridim]

27. +Yep

[great white snark]

77. True.

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. AGREED.....they act SOOO Innocent don't they

so damn disingenuous....

[kristopher]

105. +1000

[uponit7771]

118. +1

[pangaia]

142. HATE ? That's a pretty strong term. Where does hate, whatever that is, come into it.

[onehandle]

8. I think his policy of not going to the Capitol and calling out the obstructionists one by one sucks.

That being said, I support him 100% and will be voting this Fall.

Early and often.

[Glitterati]

10. In his own words......It is your job to hold my feet to the fire

‘Your job is to hold my feet to the fire…so, you need to be out there everyday raising these issues, telling us when we’re doing the right or wrong thing. My role is to be President of the United States, and your role is to be a strong voice for people who aren’t always heard.’

[Whisp]

25. I don't think he meant to char them into stumps

with the kind of language and insults toward him some here consider 'criticism'. ha.

[Glitterati]

29. Based on that quote

I have to disagree. He added no qualifiers to his own statement.

[Whisp]

36. the qualifier for me is just simple respect

I see that that is something many others don't agree with.

the ones who hurl shit at him constantly all in the guise of 'feet to the fire' is stinky bullshit.

[Control-Z]

83. Yes, it is stinky bullshit!!

If it were not, they would have cheered when they heard SS reforms had been dropped. Hell, they would have taken credit for holding his feet to the fire and causing the desired outcome.

[cui bono]

93. We should cheer him for taking back something that should never have been touched in the first place

???

That's a low bar you've set for people to be happy with him.

That's like praising a wife beater for stopping the beatings.

Oh and btw... SS is not off the table:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4540128

Good thing we didn't cheer.

[Control-Z]

97. As far as I know

the president never "touched" Social Security. He spoke about it in the scheme of bargaining but it never happened. I'm not sure how you can view it as something that happened and has now been reversed, taken back or whatever it is you think.

As far as off the table? I never said anything about "off the table". I said the president dropped the the SS reforms (from his budget). Which he did.

[cui bono]

99. He put it on the table. Now it is normal to do that. It used to be unheard of.

What good is dropping them from his budget if they're still on the table? He'll just offer them up again - without even making the Republicans do the asking - when he "negotiates" with them over something.

Offering up SS is not a Democratic position/principle.

[merrily]

137. He spoke about it before his inauguration, not only in the context of

negotiations.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/15/AR2009011504114.html

[uponit7771]

119. +1

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. In a democracy, it is the peoples' responsibility to hold public servants accountable.

[Autumn]

12. Yep. Thanks for doing it.

[SidDithers]

17. Doing nothing but, on the other hand, does...nt

Sid

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. And a quick site search shows this is the only thread ever to use the phrase "POTUS hater"

You thought it was necessary to mention something about a phrase never before used on DU?

[smokey nj]

24. On DU, critics of the President's policies are often accused of hating him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024541396


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024541396#post12

[JustAnotherGen]

32. I responded to that thread

I didn't think the accusation was there - just read it again . . . I don't see it.

There are a few breaks/demographics on the site.

The thread you linked to was not directed at the criticism of Obama/NSA/Snowden/Marijuana crowd . . . it was directed at the I'm Starting To Not Give A Shit About Anything but my Bank Account crowd - myself included.

It's directed at the cynics that care more about new business opportunities and affordable housing and education in our own little towns who are finding solutions by reaching across the aisle to Republicans.
Point blank - I'm finding these grand philosophical national discussion are worthless and don't accomplish much . . . so why should I care about National Elections.

And I know I'm not the only person who thinks that way here. I'll vote for the Democratic Candidate in NJ 7th but there is a real need for a reality check if anyone believes she's actually going to win!
Now filling my council with another Democratic or two - that's possible.

[smokey nj]

33. Did you miss post #12 in that thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024541396#post12

[JustAnotherGen]

35. Same old same old

That poster took it there - but I still think it's more directed at the cynics.

The group that I've had the impression Scuba aligns with (from a thoughtful post he made in the AA group) - I don't think that's the target of that op at all. That poster took it there - not the OP.

Me - I'm a cynic. Officially after last night this is a place for me to laugh with other like minded individuals at the absolute insanity America is being over run with - nothing more and nothing less. You can't fight the Koch Brothers my friend!

[smokey nj]

37. The original poster is the author of that post.

[JustAnotherGen]

40. Oh well

He's entitled to his opinion just as much as Scuba is.

Keep in mind - they both amuse me! This tit for tat shit is getting really really funny now! Sometimes I imagine groups of DU'ers standing around on the playground giving each other the 8th grade hair flip.

[Autumn]

43. There are plenty of posts calling other people Obama haters

The term POTUS hater is not used. I think Scuba is too decent to use the words Obama and hater together in a sentence.

[Autumn]

51. Here's just a few links. POTUS hater is only a term the OP used, the POTUS is Obama

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023649004

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2607108

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2319107

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2447257

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023558045

and it goes on and on and on.

[muriel_volestrangler]

71. Those are all from 2013. The OP used quotes, which normally indicates a quote,

and felt they needed to start a new thread about this. If it's just a whine about how DU has been for 6 years, what was the point?

[Autumn]

72. There are more recent ones. I saw a couple yesterday but don't

remember the posters. It's an ongoing thing. Lots of whines get posted about.

[cui bono]

96. I guess you post a lot without reading much then.

"hater" is used quite often towards Obama policy critics.

[Myrina]

19. For real.

I don't recall seeing a requirement to join the Cult of Personality on the DU Membership signup form.

[wryter2000]

21. Calling him no better than Bush is hating him.

I don't know if you've ever done that, but I've seen plenty of people who have. I hate Bush. I think most people here do. If you say Obama = Bush, you're hating him.

[heaven05]

28. well if this is what was said by OP presenter

then that definitely qualifies as hate. Bush was not anywhere near competent. Our POTUS is extremely competent. Light years ahead of the intelligence of bush the minor. Light years!!!!

[A Simple Game]

178. We may not like what Bush did while in the White House, but how can you say he wasn't competent?

He accomplished the first thing he said he was going to do which were the tax cuts, his successor even continued them past their expiration date. He started one more war than even hoped for by the biggest war mongers. Etc., etc., etc. The only major thing I can think of that he wanted and didn't get were cuts to Social Security, as for his successor continuing his attempt... the jury seems to still be out.

I think it's obvious Bush was very successful for his base, for liberals, not so much. He accomplished most of what he set out to do, there is no denying that.

[heaven05]

180. no argument here

argument is meaningless. He was very successful in following orders from above. Him planning, no. Him executing, yes. This POTUS a better planner, and an intellectual with a brilliant mind. Bush jr, not so much. In fact I would venture to say he is one of the least intelligent people to hold that office in the last 200 hundred years. He was a joke, always will be in my book. His father was famous for cynical jokes, Clarence Thomas was one after Thurgood Marshal. And he had a joke of an idiot son. I wish the shoe had hit him, personally.

[A Simple Game]

181. I wish the shoe had hit him too, but do you really think someone that

stupid can fool the people into electing them President, twice? He must be smart enough to follow a script.

And no, they didn't have to steal that many votes.

[heaven05]

182. rove et al stole two elections and that's called a coup

knew it then, know it now. He was installed. SCOTUS was complicite and rove was the genius following who's orders? We'll never see them crawling out from under the rocks in the swamp they live in. Any fool can follow a script. Raygun anyone? But anyway, no argument at all. I agree in principle and fact.

[OnyxCollie]

38. How childlike.

Show me the difference between Obama and Bush.

Officials: American al-Qaeda can be targeted and killed
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2002-12-03-american-al-qaeda_x.htm

The Bush administration sees it differently. In killing him, the administration defined Derwish as an enemy combatant, the equivalent of a U.S. citizen who fights with the enemy on a battlefield, officials said. Under this legal definition, experts say, his constitutional rights are nullified and he can be killed outright.

Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at Northwestern University School of Law
http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html

Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. “Due process” and “judicial process” are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.

"If you say Obama = Bush, you're hating him." LOL!

[wryter2000]

45. Do you hate Bush?

Because I sure do.

[OnyxCollie]

47. Hate? I'm more mature than to "hate" someone I've never met.

Did I approve of Bush's policies? Absolutely not. His policies sucked.

Do I hate Obama? No. Do I think his policies suck? For the most part, yes.

[noiretextatique]

55. wow, you are an adult

i feel exactly the same way, except i do dislike bush, jr. he's is mean-spirited, nasty person, and it shows all over his rotten face. i feel the same way about teabaggers and rw idiots...strongly dislike them.

i can't say that i've ever felt love for any politician, but obama is clearly a likeable person. however, some of his policies do suck. i don't understand why some have a problem with criticism of his bad policies. it is really childish.

[DeSwiss]

58. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!!

- It's like we've warped back into the 7th grade or something around here. The have no arguments, just lub or hate......

[2naSalit]

48. Your admission of hate

for one does not necessarily equate with the definition posed by another. Just because you admit to hating one president does not automatically mean that the person making a comparison of two presidents (regardless of who they are) hates either of them, just because you hate one of them...

[wryter2000]

49. It's hard to define hate

But someone who starts a totally unnecessary war in order to get himself "re"elected is certainly deserving of scorn that Obama doesn't deserve.

Now I'm done because as far as I'm concerned considering the two of them equivalent is also not dealing with reality.

TTFN

[jeff47]

46. I'm sure the 7M people who can now see a doctor will agree.

Or are we going to pretend that there is only ever one issue in a presidency?

[heaven05]

22. of course not

who's hating? I don't agree with his every decision either. No one could, I don't think.

[JustAnotherGen]

42. +1000

Do I support him? Hell to the yeah! But agree with him on everything? Hell no!

[JustAnotherGen]

26. Is there a link

That this is referring to? Thanks!

ETA - was posted by another person up thread. Hang in there Scuba!

[pnwmom]

30. Of course it doesn't. But there are some people who seem to have made it their mission here,

since Obama was elected, to criticize him at almost every turn.

And they criticize him for things he has no control over -- like the Republican Congress. Or the filibuster rules in the Senate.

[hobbit709]

31. Lately it seems if you're not in 150% agreement with a poster on practically ANY subject

you are labelled a "hater" or something similar.

[Bobbie Jo]

75. Exaggeration

Exaggeration misleads the credulous and offends the perceptive. ~Eliza Cook

[wocaonimabi]

34. Well stated besides the President has plenty of people on the payroll to defend and spin his

policies, he does not need people on the internet trying to defend what he did.

If you are not present at the discussion on the policy that was put forward all you are doing is GUESSING as to why the President did something. Links do not mean shit becasue all they do is link to paid blow hards who were also not present at the discussions but were told second and third hand from people who may or may not have been present.

Now if you were in the room and have first hand information you should clearly state you work for the POTUS. When the people here that are doing the defending have ZERO insite into the Presidents rational it comes accross no differently then Fox Defending all thing GOP.

[jsr]

39. Half-heartedly clapping is completely unacceptable.

[ctsnowman]

44. lol NT

[L0oniX]

147. +1

[ProSense]

41. The amazing thing

is that more people will pay attention to this OP than will sign the ACLU's petition on Net Neutrality.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024530190

[cali]

52. lol. yes indeedy only YOUR posts deserve attention, pro.

[Autumn]

53. Oh shit cali ! I signed that petition.

Was I supposed to tell her or rec her OP??

[ProSense]

65. "Was I supposed to tell her or rec her OP?? "

Damn, you're kewl!

[Autumn]

69. Why thanks Pro. That was a good petition.

Everyone should sign it

[ProSense]

64. LOL!

"lol. yes indeedy only YOUR posts deserve attention, pro."

I'm not an attention hound. I fine with being ignored. By your comment though, you appear to think that's what it's all about.

Did you sign the petition?

[DeSwiss]

61. Amazing?

- No. Well, to some maybe.

[Rex]

50. Well I think there are some trolls here that know it is a golden ticket.

They can call anyone a 'Obama hater' and not have to explain why they believe said poster is a hater. Golden ticket. Any other time, that kind of talk would be labeled as disruptive.

Instant golden ticket for trolls imo.

[Puglover]

124. Exactly.

I have thought pretty much forever that we have loads of trolls that disrupt and divide by hiding behind the "I love President Obama" meme and everyone else is a "Hater".

Never substance, simply an accusation of not giving enough support to the Prez.

[Rex]

164. Yes, they NEVER try and debate the person doing the critique.

Just like you said, never any substance - just the same old broken record of accusing others of hatred like that validates them in some way.

[silvershadow]

54. And yet, it

isnecessary with some folk. That said, I am not a hater. Especially since chained cpi is off the table for another year at least. Recommended.

[mrchips]

62. One Poster wanted to Vomit

Just because the president acknowledged a wounded veteran in the SOTU. That sure seemed over the line to me. Yet when I replied to that comment I was suspended for it.

[Scuba]

66. The President's backing of the TPP makes me want to vomit. Is that over the line?

[Kolesar]

78. Today, there is a headline about your sig line

chained CPI & such
"needs work"

[Scuba]

86. My sig line? What primary will the President be facing?

[Kolesar]

185. Obtuse eom

[mrchips]

102. Actually, NO!

I can no think of any progressive reason for supporting the TPP. That is a policy position. The chained CPI, NSA Drone usage, and his willingness to offer the store for minor concessions to tax reforms long overdue have all been a source of frustration. But to call a veteran who was permanently disabled after ten tours of duty a "tool" struck me as pathetic as spitting on vets after they returned from Vietnam Nam. Is that acceptable to you? Because it resulted in my being suspended. Apparently some Obama haters on this site are nothing more than sycophants of purists who relish kangaroo court justice.

[Scuba]

110. This veteran disagrees, and did so in that thread.

[merrily]

154. ....

The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory and the Legacy of Vietnam is a 1998 book by sociologist Jerry Lembcke. The book argues that the common claim that American soldiers were spat upon and insulted by anti-war protesters upon returning home from the Vietnam War is an urban legend intended to discredit the anti-war movement. Lembcke's book argues, further, that posttraumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, is a socially constructed diagnostic category that disparages the image of Vietnam veterans and provided another way to discredit the many veterans in the anti-war movement. Lembcke writes that this discrediting of the anti-war movement was foreshadowed by Hermann Göring's fostering of the stab in the back myth, after Germany's defeat in Europe in 1918.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spitting_Image

[Skittles]

91. what a simplistic, asinine statement

you need to study reading comprehension

[mrchips]

120. BS

You are full of it. You are a practitioner of cowardice.

[mrchips]

131. Nothing But Insults

That's all you've got.

[Skittles]

172. LOL

your responses make it clear what YOU have

[mrchips]

174. Brainless

The fact is a poster on this site went crazy because the president acknowledged a wounded vet at the SOTU, and called the vet a "tool." I take exception to that kind of garbage and said as much.
You called it bullshit, but did not explain why. That's what trolls do. So keep your ignorant responses to yourself. I have no more use for empty headed twits.

[Skittles]

177. I'm debating whether or not this is worth my time

my gut instinct is - no fucking way

[sadoldgirl]

63. Somehow I don't see

that the word hate is of any use in any debate. Policies should be examined and analyzed by every citizen ( I wish it were so). Criticism is actually a form of compliment, because the issue is taken seriously. I understand anger, because it can be constructive, but hate? Accusing others of hate is immature to say the least.

[Rex]

67. +1

nt.

[valerief]

70. Don't feed the trolls! nt

[Bluenorthwest]

73. Hate is what is going on in Uganda, Arizona, Russia.

The people who hurl that word about like a nerf ball are protected, privileged types who casually invoke that which they will never have to actually endure.

[SMC22307]

76. I don't really care if they think I am a hater.

Quite frankly, I "like" Obama, but his #1 fans leave a lot to be desired...

[Kolesar]

79. #1 fans?

What does that mean?

[Bobbie Jo]

88. It's *criticism*

you know, etc...

[Kolesar]

184. It's *flame bait*

I know.

[great white snark]

80. GOTV 2014

Focus.

[stupidicus]

81. yep, that point was made long ago to those with a por sense of things

even amongst those of us who are tired of electing the "lesser of two evils" there's no question as to which one is the greater evil.

It is after all, that fear of rightwingnuttery that paves the way for the trial balloons and efforts that keep DC politics and policy inching in the rightwing direction.

The expectation that we lefties should share their love for the members of the corporate wing of the dem party, or to have patience with policy choices that favor them alone, are two of the stupidest things I've seen around here. It's not just their insults, etc, that is so troubling, but also the undeniable enabling of things the rest of us find objectionable. Isn't their "hurry up and wait and see what happens" BS a recipe for "too late to do anything"?

Without us can it be said that chained cpi, the TPP, Keystone, NSA spying, etc, etc, etc, or anything that might recieve additional consideration would have or will recieve it?

If they had their way, us stealth Romneyites/Bushbots/Paulites, etc, and BHO haters and ODS sufferers woulda had our mouths sewn shut quite a while ago, no?

Not only should it not be necessary to mention it, it's also an exercise in futility to do so in terms of modifying their behavior, given their failure to do so after what, at least 2-3 years now. While they may differ ideologically from the rightwingers, when it comes to efforts at crushing dissent they are like Siamese twins, and working for the same master.

[Tikki]

85. Some may be confused because we hated all of boosh's policies and we hated him as POTUS.

President Barack Obama is not______________________.

Tikki

[bigwillq]

87. K and R

[quinnox]

89. It does mean that to some especially devoted folk though. To them, hate = criticizing Obama's

policies. That has been going on for a very long time. It is like a reflex action almost - "You don't like the NSA spying?" "You have always hated the president anyway!"

"So you don't like Obama's environmental proposals?" "You Obama-hater!"

To this kind of mindset, if you don't praise everything Obama does, you must be "the enemy".

[Skittles]

90. it does in the tiny minds of the Tiger Beat crowd

don't worry - that mentality will expire in 2017 - they're pure hypocrites

[myrna minx]

98. While I'm quite grateful for many of the strides we have made during President Obama's terms,

especially for Lilly Ledbetter and the huge strides for LGBT rights, and I'm grateful that we're not contending with a McCain or Romney administration (*shudders*), I'm equally appalled by an attitude here that if one is dismayed by NSA spying, drone strikes and "kill lists", the secretive TPP "fast track" trade agreement, the prospect of chained CPI/slashing SS benefits (extra horror - that it's in any way associated in the public mind as a Democratic proposal) the "race to the top" in education and the Keystone pipeline, fraking and "clean coal" - that that makes one a "hateful libertarian" to many here. These issues have been near and dear to me since I signed on to DU in 2002 and because I'm not "on board" with the White House messaging, this, to some, makes me: an ultra radical leftist - yet also a right wing tea party fire bagger racist Rand Paul/Putin loving "hater" who is also a purist because I hold these things dear to my heart.

I still have the letter I received from Senator Wellstone when I wrote to him begging him not to vote for NAFTA and here we are 20+ years on, ready to make it worse with what we've been able to piece together about the clandestine the TPP scheme. I also gave Senator Wellstone hell for his baffling vote on DOMA, so to say that we lefties only started our criticism of Dems once President Obama was elected (the implication being that lefty criticism is exclusive of President Obama and therefore inherently racist) is mind boggling. Had DU been around for President Clinton's third way NAFTA, DOMA, Telecommunications act of 1996 and the egregious "Welfare Reform", this place (if it would be anything like the DU when I first signed up in 2002) would be on fire. I'm sure we lefties would have been shouted down back then too. I'm sure all of these awful acts were "pragmatic" to many then.

I voted for President Obama twice, but how am I to *trust* an Administration who is *pushing* for things I'm wholly opposed to? In addition, I'm to believe that he's only "bluffing" on other things I'm wholly opposed to? Back in the olden days of DU, I was one of the great many who said during the Bush nightmare: "I'd be against this even if a Democrat was in power", but now we're just expected to get on board or be ostracized as a "racist ODS libertarian".

Also - I'm tired of the truthiness common wisdom myth here that it was the liberals/lefties that cost the 2010 election. It wasn't. It's the liberal/lefties that are the door knockers, GOTV registers, caucus goers/primary voters, phone bankers, drive the elderly and/or disabled to the polls folks that are taken for granted each election so I can say that it's rather sicking that we're accused of losing elections. The 2010 election was lost because the "moderates" and "pragmatics" didn't vote Democratic.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023763623

I'm also a staunch feminist who is appalled that women's issues are a subject of routine mockery here. When a recent "See You on Tuesday" too clever by half post survives a jury with flying colors, I think I may be at the wrong website.

I used to love it here. DU was my lifeline during the Bush years, and I'm grateful for the wonderful people I've met over the years and the relationships I've developed, but wow, I'm not the STFU type on lefty, LGBT, racial/call out racist, cultural, feminist, "free" trade, spying, environmental positions because it conflicts with either the White House or certain posters here.

I'll leave my rant with Eddy Izzard:

(Ps - I'm all for gun control too!)

[Scuba]

111. Terrific post. Thank you myrna.

[Solly Mack]

121. Well said!

[blkmusclmachine]

107. The "for him or against him" line reeks of sock puppetry to me.

[joshcryer]

108. And not criticizing doesn't make one a "third wayer" "DLCer" "right winger."

[Bodhi BloodWave]

175. sadly enough though

the quality of DUers have been sinking for a number of years now, with many good DUers vanishing due to the current 'climate'

You'd think more people on a site like DU would know how politics works

[joshcryer]

179. I just can't stand the echo chamber.

The critics are the worst echo chamber on this forum. I can still get political discussion but it is so drowned out.

[wocaonimabi]

112. President Obama keeps saying Make Me do it

So how does one get him to act like a f-ing Democrat instead a GD Republican?

I do not donate enough money to get his ear neither do most on DU.

He is still ignoring or giving lip service to the many of the WH petitions.

He continues to appoint Conservatives, Banksters and Lobbyists to his Administration against the wishes of the majority of the party base.

His walking shoes are still unworn and now have a layer of dust on them.

Then we have the nonsense with Race to the Bottom, GITMO, NSA and Drones and.....

Seems to me all the little people get is lip service, photo ops and a few crumbs every once in a while, sadly that is all it takes to placate many in the Democratic Party to ignore what is really going on.

So how do WE get the POTUS to Change and do what WE want when the POTUS just gives lip service to the People?

Call me a Obama Hater if you will I do not care I voted for a Democratic President not a GD Republican!

[Scuba]

113. Yeah, the "make me do it" line really didn't flip my flapjacks. We stood in line to vote ....

... so we could get the policies he espoused on the campaign trail. Now, somehow, we're still supposed to "make him do it" but can't even get his ear because Jamie Dimon is screaming into it.

[wocaonimabi]

115. But But Prsident Hillary will make it all better!

You will see and you best vote for her or (Insert Name of wingnut de jour) will become President!

[jsr]

134. "Make me NOT cut Social Security like I want to"

[davidpdx]

114. But constantly harping on him does

You called yourself out there.

[ReRe]

116. It's a playground taunt, Scuba...

... pay it no mind. And same here to what you said.

[Progressive dog]

122. No but it is good to bear in mind that unsolicited denials

are often interpreted as by Hamlet's mother, "the lady doth protest too much methinks."

[Token Republican]

123. Credibility

Mindless criticism of the POTUS by the other side only helps get the POTUS and that party reelected. In 2014, the repubs' criticism of Obama is beyond stupid and only serves to undercut any real criticisms of his policies. Valid criticism of POTUS specific policies also helps keep the president reminded that s/he's the employee and we are the boss.

This won't be popular here, but hopefully it will be taken in the spirit in which its offered, but the dems made the exact same mistake in the 2004 election. There were a lot, a real lot, of valid criticisms against bush. But they were so overplayed that the real ones were drowned out by the noise to such an extent that they were ignored. Had the left played their hand better, the 2004 results would have been very different.

Its impossible for a group of people to fully support each and every issue. We're humans, not ants, and differences of opinions exist. We ultimately choose candidates whose policies most closely match our own views.

[Scuba]

126. Thanks, good post. Your analysis of Dem criticisms towards Bush in '04 have merit.

I would add that the better criticisms of Bush were ignored by the major media, not because the left made a lot of noise about nothing, but because the major media is owned and controlled by the same people who backed Bush.

[wolfie001]

125. A little late on this topic but......

......his Sec of Education is a Corporatist saboteur, his initial Economic Pow-Wow contained ZERO Labor/Liberal viewpoints (but it did have Jeffrey Immelt, vomit), he's been appointing judges at a snail's pace and is oh so sensitive to ANY ReichWing criticism, and now we find out that it was the Replugs that pulled the plug on his obsession to unleash the CPI that will endanger a program that actually helps most Americans. More like a smorgasburg of policy disagreements if one can claim to even be a Democrat.

[Scuba]

127. Careful, mention of these digressions may earn you a reputation of being "filled with hate".

[wolfie001]

130. lol. I onetime threw a wrench into a ......

Hillary2016 debate where I inconveniently brought up her Walmart/Corporate ties and boy oh boy did the sh$t hit the fan. I would like to see her as Prez but if we don't let her know about our expectations than we may end up with eight more years of not enough getting done.

[pragmatic_dem]

132. In China, N. Korea, Russia, Iran, they never criticize their elected leaders...

and they also extensively spy on their own people, have massive income disparity, institutional corruption, a paramilitary police state and an unaccountable elite ruling class who passes legislation out of self interest.

hmmm...

[mopinko]

133. yeah but swallowing stupid media memes about the president

and coming here and regurgitating them will get the criticism that is deserved.

[raindaddy]

139. People feel betrayed...

Barack Obama campaigned as a liberal and governs right to center. Especially when it comes to issues such as national defense, Wall Street and the continuing corporate influence in the decisions that affect our lives and the health of our planet. Of course there's going to be passionate criticism! People don't like being lied to, it's that simple. One can can get angry over policy without making it personal. I don't know if anyone remembers the "hate" directed towards LBJ from the left after he escalated the war in Vietnam? Obama isn't getting anything close to that...

I don't see how anyone could "hate" Barrack Obama personally! He's one of the most likable personalities I've ever seen in politics and I have nothing but goodwill toward him and his beautiful wife and family. I'm just disappointed in his presidency, much like I was with LBJ and Bill Clinton...

[Scuba]

143. Great post, thanks.

[pragmatic_dem]

141. OP has good point - approximately 3,710,000 Obama haters called out here...

https://www.google.com/search?q=obama-hater&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com

Health care reform which leaves the middle class without any price relief, offshoring jobs, spying, TPP, amnesty for bank fraud, corporate welfare - there's ample room for dissent over our president's extreme compromises and deference to corporations without being called an Obama-hater.

While people rally around wedge issues, Washington is taking more and more away from us.

For example, Texas' Root'n Toot'n Greg Abbott is playing school prayer like a violin, meanwhile his state is literally one of dumbest in nation, a strategy to keep Texas workers uninsured and at poverty wages.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11770367/3/5-dumbest-states-in-america.html

That's how a wedge issue works. You get all teary eye'd over some emotional issue and before you can dry your eyes 600,000 more jobs are sent to India and a drone is flying over your head, forwarding your phone calls to NSA.

[Scuba]

145. In fairness, many (most?) of the 3,710,000 posts with that search phrase aren't directed at DU ....

... members levelling reasonable criticisms, but at some real Obama haters outside our forum.

Your analysis of how we're being suckered on a few divisive issues while having the rug pulled from under us is exactly correct. Thanks for that well articulated statement.

[uppityperson]

169. Did you know that 1 post can show up several times doing a search like that?

It can show up as its own post, and as a reply to another post, and with several of the DU servers. And now if I type obama hater, mine will also. Those 3,7100,000 results are not individuals.

[Baitball Blogger]

144. I don't even understand why this sort of thing goes on in GD.

There is an Obama group which has the freedom to block anyone they want. Why would they want to censor opinions on GD too? This is a progressive website. If Obama supports blue dog policies, then there is bound to be differences of opinion.

[L0oniX]

148. I HATE OBAMA DAMN IT ALL TO HELL! There ...I feel better now.

I just figured I'd give all the idiots who claim there are Obama haters on DU an example they can use so what they have been saying is now true. Call it my "reaching across the isle". I mean there has to be some truth to what they say about DU being full of Obama haters right? I will also say this ....I will never vote for Obama ever again! There ...now the idiots who accuse those that do not approve of an Obama policy of not going to vote for the next Dem are correct ...right?

Hey... The Voice is on ...I gotta go now ...enjoy the Obama hate.

[gulliver]

150. There's a range between Ted Nugent-like comments...

...and legitimate criticism that lately a majority of "criticism" in GD falls into. That's the range that should be banned.

I actually think our rocket scientist population is dropping fairly dramatically here. The attacks on Obama are mainly low quality and ignorant. Interpreting them as hatred? Whatever. Who cares? The attack alone is damning.

[Bobbie Jo]

156. Indeed.

See above, idiocy abounds.

Low quality, and yes, ignorant.

[merrily]

155. Talking about either loving or hating someone we've never met

seems so odd to me.

[hughee99]

157. If I understand correctly, it makes one a racist.

As I understand it, people only disagree with the president's positions because they're upset the president is black.

[Bobbie Jo]

158. Yeah, that's it.

brilliant analysis.

[hughee99]

159. It's not MY analysis. n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

161. I stand corrected

it's just your "understanding."

Heh...don't blame you, I wouldn't claim it either.

[hughee99]

163. It's not hard to find those that would argue it...

you can find some here

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3042330

[Bobbie Jo]

165. Whooooosh

Nevermind.

Clueless is as clueless does.

[hughee99]

166. Agreed.

Peddle your snark elsewhere.

[Bobbie Jo]

168. And when you peddle

such simplistic, disingenuous nonsense, don't be surprised to get called on it.

Why do you hate Amerrrika?

[hughee99]

171. Obviously, because the president is black. n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

173. Undoubtably.

[ProSense]

160. Remember when people wanted

Medicare to negotiate drug prices:

CMS issues rule to empower it to negotiate drug prices, opponents immediately spin it as a negative.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024544733

That thread is full of crickets.

[alcibiades_mystery]

170. "I'm not sure why it's necessary to mention this, but apparently it is."

Three times a week, apparently.

[Drunken Irishman]

176. However, when all you do is criticize (not saying you - in general) the President, you are a hater.

Let's not pretend there is just mild banter about issues some DUers don't like here. There are a collection of users who have not said one nice thing about the President ever. They attack him at near the same rate as the right, and when he does something right, they're there to attack him then too (either for being too late, not doing enough or being only forced to do it).

But a lot of people like to dismiss that - as this thread proves.

So, yeah, there are a great deal of haters on this site. They'll dismiss being called that - but when they do nothing but most negative things about the President, that pretty much is the definition of a hater. Glenn Beck is not a hater because he disagrees with Obama on a lot of issues. He's a hater because he compulsively, and obsessively, attacks the President. They exist here, too, unfortunately.

[pragmatic_dem]

183. Agree, balance needed e.g. he looks good with shirt off, spying on us all is fucked-up for a dem